Rimima Trading (Opc) PVT. LTD. vs. The State Of Assam And 2 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Rimima Trading (OPC) Pvt. Ltd., a registered entity under the GST Act, challenged the order dated 11.09.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Guwahati-D-8, cancelling its GST registration. The cancellation was based on the petitioner's failure to file returns. The petitioner claims it did not receive the show cause notice issued on 15.07.2023 via the portal, as it was not actively conducting business at the time. Subsequently, the registration was cancelled. The petitioner stated it had filed returns for August and September of the financial year 2024-25 and had approached the authority for revocation, but the request was not entertained due to the expiry of the period. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition.
Held
The Court held that the facts of the present case were similar to those in the case of Motaleb Bhuyan Vs. The State Of Assam And Ors. Consequently, the petitioner was entitled to similar reliefs. The order of cancellation of registration dated 11.09.2024 was set aside and quashed. The petitioner was directed to file returns for the period from 15.07.2023 till the date of the order within 30 days, with a note that if returns were already filed, no fresh filing would be necessary. The period stipulated in Section 73(10) of the CGST Act, 2017, for computation was directed to be from the date of the judgment, except for the financial year 2025-26, which would be as per Section 44 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was also made liable to pay arrears of tax, penalty, interest, and late fees.
Key Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of GST registration on the ground of failure to furnish returns, when the petitioner claims to have filed returns for subsequent periods and did not receive the show cause notice, is sustainable in law? (Question of law and mixed fact and law, turning on Section 30 of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and principles of natural justice). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the cancellation was erroneous as it had filed returns for August and September 2024-25 and had attempted to seek revocation. It also argued that it did not receive the show cause notice, which was only uploaded on the portal, and therefore, the cancellation violated principles of natural justice. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (State of Assam and others).
Sections Cited
Section 30, Section 73(10), Section 44
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. M. Shelim, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. B. Choudhury, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondents.
The petitioner herein has filed the instant writ petition challenging the order dated 11.09.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Guwahati-D-8 whereby the petitioner's registration was cancelled. The brief facts which led to the filing of the instant writ petition are narrated herein under.
The petitioner claims to be a contractor and a supplier undertaking various forms of contractual works of civil nature and also supplies various products. For the purpose of carrying on the business, the petitioner was registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and was issued a registration number bearing 18AAMCR1966P2ZF.
It is the case of the petitioner that it did not file the “Nil GST Return” which is otherwise mandatory for a registered dealer. The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, i.e. the respondent No.3 issued a show cause notice for cancellation of the registration in Page No.# 3/4 Form GST REG-17 dated 15.07.2023 to the petitioner in the portal. It was further mentioned in the said show cause notice that the registration of the petitioner stood suspended w.e.f. 15.07.2023. As the said notice was only put in the portal and the petitioner, at that relevant point of time was not carrying out any business, the petitioner failed to take note of the show cause notice issued, and accordingly, the petitioner did not file any reply. On 11.09.2024, the respondent No.3 cancelled the registration on the ground of failure to furnish return for the prescribed period. The registration was given effect from 11.09.2024. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had submitted the return on August and September for the financial year 2024-25. The filing of the return in GSTR-3B has been enclosed as Annexures 4 & 5 to the writ petition. It is the case of Page No.# 4/4 Assam And Ors, reported in 2025 (6) GLR 79. 7. It is the opinion of this Court that as the facts of the instant case are similar to those petitioners in the judgment rendered in the case of Motaleb Bhuyan, (supra), the petitioner herein is entitled to similar reliefs. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:- (i) The order of cancellation of registration dated 11.09.2024 is set aside and quashed. (ii) The petitioner herein is directed to file the returns for the period from 15.07.2023 till date, within 30 days from the date of the instant order. It is observed that if the returns have been filed, there shall no necessity for filing again. (iii) The period as stipulated in Section 73(10) of the CGST Act of 2017 shall be computed from the date of the instant judgment, except for the financial year 2025-26, which shall be as per Section 44 of the CGST Act of 2017. (iv) The petitioner herein shall also be liable to make payment of the arrears, i.e. tax, penalty, interest and late fees.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant Pradip Kumar Kalita Kalita Date: 2026.02.12 18:42:53 +05'30'
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.